Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 760M delivers a playable experience for Inside only at 1080p, with performance degrading sharply as resolution increases. The data shows a clear GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s 14 cores and 18 threads provide ample headroom for this puzzle platformer’s demands. The combo finishes near the bottom of the tested database, ranked 2876 out of 2887 combinations, indicating that this iGPU solution is not built for high-fidelity gaming above entry-level settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a dramatic and consistent performance drop as resolution scales from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the High preset, the average frame rate falls from 48 FPS at 1080p to 34 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 14 FPS, and then further drops to 22 FPS at 4K. This trajectory demonstrates that the AMD Radeon 760M, with its 512 shading units and 16 ROPs, becomes the primary limiting factor well before reaching 4K.

The scaling pattern is most pronounced at the Low settings tier. Here, the average FPS at 1080p is 96, which drops to 69 FPS at 1440p (a 27 FPS decline) and then to 43 FPS at 4K. This steep decline at lower graphical loads confirms that the integrated GPU’s pixel throughput is the bottleneck; reducing settings does not alleviate the resolution penalty because the underlying fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints remain unchanged. The Radeon 760M’s memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," and its pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s, which is insufficient for 4K rendering in this title.

At the Medium preset, the only tier with complete min/max data, the pattern holds. The average FPS drops from 77 at 1080p (with min 65 and max 88) to 55 at 1440p (min 47, max 63), and finally to 35 at 4K (min 29, max 40). The 4K Medium result sits just above the 30 FPS playability threshold, but the minimum of 29 FPS indicates occasional stutter. The Ultra preset mirrors High almost exactly, with 46 FPS at 1080p, 33 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K, suggesting that the Ultra and High presets impose a similar load on the GPU.

The data indicates that 1080p is the only resolution where this combo can maintain a consistently smooth experience across all settings. At 1440p, the Low preset achieves 69 FPS, which is acceptable, but Medium drops to 55 FPS and High/Ultra fall into the mid-30s, which is marginal for action sequences. The 4K results are uniformly below 45 FPS even at Low, making that resolution impractical for this hardware. The scaling behavior strongly suggests a GPU-limited scenario: the CPU’s performance is not the constraint, as evidenced by the consistent frame rate drops that align with pixel count increases rather than scene complexity.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, which does not feature complex AI or physics simulations, this CPU provides far more computational headroom than the GPU can utilize. The processor’s benchmark results reinforce this: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11875.5 and a single-core score of 1700 place it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of installed processors.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and the Intel Core i5-13500HX. The Core Ultra 5 135H scores 0.1% lower than the Ryzen 7 5800X and 0.6% lower than the i5-13500HX, but it beats the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT by 0.5%. These delta percentages are negligible in real-world gaming, especially in a title like Inside where frame pacing is more dependent on the GPU’s ability to render the dark, atmospheric scenes.

Given that the measured FPS at 1080p Low reaches 96 FPS, the CPU is clearly capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls to sustain high frame rates. The 18 threads and 18 MB of shared L3 cache ensure that any background tasks or system overhead do not interfere with game performance. The CPU’s Passmark multi-thread score of 22422 and single-thread score of 3521 further confirm that it is not a bottleneck; even the weakest GPU results in this test are more than 30% higher than the minimum playable threshold, indicating the CPU has significant idle capacity.

The fact that FPS scales inversely with resolution rather than with scene complexity suggests that the CPU is never waiting on its own calculations. If the processor were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS across resolutions at the same settings, which is not the case. The data shows a clear monotonic decrease in FPS as resolution increases, which is the signature of a GPU that is saturated. The CPU’s role here is to maintain a stable frame delivery, and its high single-thread performance ensures that the game’s main loop is not subject to hitches, even when the GPU is struggling at 4K.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Inside at 4K resolution?*

A: The data shows average FPS of 43 at Low settings and 35 at Medium settings for 3840x2160. While the Medium preset’s average of 35 FPS is technically above the 30 FPS threshold, the minimum FPS of 29 indicates occasional drops below playable levels. High and Ultra settings produce 22 and 21 FPS respectively, which are not smooth. Therefore, 4K is only viable at Low settings, and even then, it is borderline.

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware?

A: The measured results clearly favor 1920x1080. At this resolution, even the Ultra preset achieves an average of 46 FPS, while Low reaches 96 FPS. The 1440p results are playable only at Low (69 FPS) and Medium (55 FPS), but High and Ultra fall to 34 and 33 FPS, which is below ideal smoothness for a game that requires precise timing.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The benchmark data indicates the GPU is the limiting component. This is evidenced by the significant FPS drops as resolution increases, while the CPU’s high benchmark scores (81st percentile) and 14 cores provide ample headroom. If the CPU were the bottleneck, FPS would remain relatively constant across resolutions.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. It performs 0.3% better than the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, but 0.5% worse than the NVIDIA Quadro P2000. These rivals are all in a similar performance tier, confirming that the 760M is a low-end solution.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows an average of 55 FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS. This provides a consistent experience above the 45 FPS threshold, making it a viable option if 1080p is not preferred.

Q: Does the Ultra preset offer a meaningful improvement over High?

A: The FPS data shows that Ultra and High presets are nearly identical in performance. At 1080p, High averages 48 FPS while Ultra averages 46 FPS, a difference of only 2 FPS. At 4K, the difference is 1 FPS (22 vs 21). This suggests the visual upgrade from High to Ultra is not worth the performance cost.

Settings Recommendations

The optimal settings for this combo depend on the user’s priority for frame rate versus visual fidelity, but the data strongly favors the Low and Medium presets over High and Ultra. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 96 FPS, which is more than sufficient for the game’s smooth, physics-based platforming. The Medium preset offers a more balanced experience at 77 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS ensuring no noticeable stutter. Given that Inside is a atmospheric puzzle game, the visual enhancements from Medium over Low are likely to be appreciated, and the 19 FPS drop from Low to Medium is a reasonable trade-off.

For users who prefer 1440p, the Low preset is the only recommendation with a high level of confidence, achieving 69 FPS. The Medium preset at 55 FPS is acceptable, but the minimum of 47 FPS shows that demanding scenes will cause noticeable frame dips. High and Ultra at 1440p produce averages of 34 and 33 FPS respectively, which are below the 40 FPS threshold that most players consider smooth for this genre. Therefore, the data suggests that 1440p should be paired with Low or Medium settings, with a clear preference for Low if consistent frame pacing is desired.

At 4K, the data indicates that only the Low preset (43 FPS) is worth considering, and even then, it is marginal. The Medium preset at 35 FPS with a minimum of 29 FPS will produce visible hitches during camera pans or scene transitions. High and Ultra are effectively unplayable at 21-22 FPS. The measured results show that the Radeon 760M’s 16 ROPs and 41.58 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient for 4K rendering, so users should not expect a satisfactory experience above Low settings.

The Ultra preset is consistently 2 FPS slower than High across all resolutions, which suggests that it enables expensive effects that do not contribute meaningfully to the game’s visual style. Since Inside uses a distinctive monochromatic art style with limited color grading, the difference between High and Ultra is likely imperceptible in practice. The recommendation is to use Medium settings at 1080p for the best balance of visual quality and performance, or Low settings at 1080p for maximum fluidity. For 1440p, Low is the safe choice, and 4K should be avoided unless the user accepts Low settings and occasional frame drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and AMD Radeon 760M combination ranks 2876 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the bottom 0.4% of all systems. This rank is primarily driven by the GPU’s weak performance, as the CPU itself is in the 81st percentile of all processors. The Radeon 760M’s percentile of 35 means it outperforms only a third of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 6019 is barely above the entry-level discrete GPUs like the RX 6400.

This ranking indicates that the combo is suitable only for low-resolution, low-settings gaming. The data shows that the system can achieve playable frame rates at 1080p, but it cannot handle the demands of 1440p or 4K gaming at higher presets. The rank of 2876 out of 2887 means there are only 11 other tested combinations that perform worse, which paints a clear picture of the hardware’s limitations.

The CPU’s strong benchmark scores do not compensate for the GPU’s weakness in this gaming scenario. While the Core Ultra 5 135H is a capable mobile processor, it is paired with an integrated GPU that is designed for basic tasks rather than demanding gaming. The combo’s ranking reflects this imbalance: the CPU is overqualified for the GPU’s output, but the GPU cannot be upgraded in this integrated configuration. The nearest GPU rivals, such as the RX 6400 and GTX 770M, are also low-end parts, confirming that the 760M sits at the bottom of the performance spectrum.

For context, the combo’s rank of 2876 suggests that any system with a discrete GPU from the past decade would likely outperform it. The measured FPS data corroborates this, as even the best result (96 FPS at 1080p Low) is only slightly above the 60 FPS standard, and the 4K results are all below 45 FPS. Users considering this hardware for Inside should expect a console-like experience at 720p or 1080p with reduced settings, not a high-end PC gaming experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and AMD Radeon 760M in Inside is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 96 FPS average
• Medium: 77 FPS average, 65 FPS minimum, 88 FPS maximum
• High: 48 FPS average
• Ultra: 46 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 69 FPS average
• Medium: 55 FPS average, 47 FPS minimum, 63 FPS maximum
• High: 34 FPS average
• Ultra: 33 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 43 FPS average
• Medium: 35 FPS average, 29 FPS minimum, 40 FPS maximum
• High: 22 FPS average
• Ultra: 21 FPS average

The data reveals a consistent pattern where the Low preset provides roughly double the frame rate of the High preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the jump from 48 FPS (High) to 96 FPS (Low) represents a 100% improvement, while at 4K, the improvement from 22 FPS to 43 FPS is slightly less dramatic but still significant. The Medium preset consistently sits about 20 FPS below Low at 1080p and 1440p, but only 8 FPS below at 4K, suggesting that the GPU’s fill rate limits become more pronounced at higher resolutions.

The only min/max data available is for the Medium preset. At 1080p, the range from 65 to 88 FPS indicates a variance of 23 FPS, which is acceptable for a smooth experience. At 1440p, the variance narrows to 16 FPS (47 to 63), but the lower minimum is more noticeable. At 4K, the variance is 11 FPS (29 to 40), and the minimum of 29 FPS falls below the 30 FPS playability threshold, making the experience feel inconsistent.

The Ultra preset is consistently 2 FPS slower than High at every resolution, which is a negligible difference. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds minimal additional GPU load beyond High. The High to Medium transition, however, shows a significant difference: at 1080p, the drop from High (48 FPS) to Medium (77 FPS) is actually an increase, indicating that High is poorly optimized compared to Medium in this game. This is an anomaly in the data, as typically High would be faster than Medium. The 1080p High result of 48 FPS is lower than the 1440p Low result of 69 FPS, which is counterintuitive, but it highlights that the High preset likely enables a specific heavy effect that the Medium preset does not.